• Report: #396121

Complaint Review: CarMax The Auto Superstore

  • Submitted: Sat, November 29, 2008
  • Updated: Thu, March 05, 2009

  • Reported By:Chesterfield Virginia
CarMax The Auto Superstore
901 Murray Olds Drive Midlothian, Virginia U.S.A.

CarMax The Auto Superstore CarMax sold me a car with Frame Damage (False Advertisement and Safety Hazzard) Midlothian Virginia

*Consumer Suggestion: I had the same problem

*Consumer Comment: You are not the only one out there....

*Consumer Comment: Curious...

What's this?
What's this?
What's this?
Is this
Ripoff Report
About you?
Ripoff Report
A business' first
line of defense
on the Internet.
If your business is
willing to make a
commitment to
customer satisfaction
Click here now..

Does your business have a bad reputation?
Fix it the right way.
Corporate Advocacy Program™

SEO Reputation Management at its best!

In February of 2005 I purchased a 2000 Ford Mustang. I noticed after a few months that the pin stripes on the front end were missing. My brother noticed that the fenders were dated for 2003. I had always assumed that the car had been wrecked but not frame damaged. CarMax clearly advertises that they do not sell cars with frame damage. I took my car to have it appraised Wed. Night of Nov. 26 at CarMax.

I figured I'd get half of Kelly Blue Book Value because of the market now. I was surprised when the sales person read to me "FRAME DAMAGE". I was very concerned because I knew I had never had anything other than regular checkups. Once again CarMax always has advertised they do not sell vehicles with "FRAME DAMAGE". I talked with the buyer and he even pointed out the frame damage right under the hood.

He told me he would do research on it and call me back. He called me on Black Friday and let me know his manager was on vacation and would be back on Monday. So I am waiting for this phone call on Monday. I sure hope that they will find that it had frame damage and they didn't do enough research on the "125 point inspection". I am a reasonable person and can understand in the Auto Market, there can be corners cut with budgets and what not. But not like this.

Now that I know what to look for, I have realized what that the buyers at CarMax were very negligent in this case. If anybody else out there has had an experience like this I would like to know. Thank you everyone and Seasons Greetings.


Stephen in Virginia

Industryhike
Chesterfield, Virginia
U.S.A.

This report was posted on Ripoff Report on 11/29/2008 10:52 PM and is a permanent record located here: http://www.ripoffreport.com/r/CarMax-The-Auto-Superstore/Midlothian-Virginia-23114/CarMax-The-Auto-Superstore-CarMax-sold-me-a-car-with-Frame-Damage-False-Advertisement-and-396121. The posting time indicated is Arizona local time. Arizona does not observe daylight savings so the post time may be Mountain or Pacific depending on the time of year.

Ripoff Report has an exclusive license to this report. It may not be copied without the written permission of Ripoff Report.

Click Here to read other Ripoff Reports on CarMax The Auto Superstore

Search for additional reports

If you would like to see more Rip-off Reports on this company/individual, search here:

Search Tips
Report & Rebuttal
Respond to this report!
What's this?
Also a victim?
What's this?
Repair Your Reputation!
What's this?
REBUTTALS & REPLIES:
0Author 3Consumer 0Employee/Owner
Updates & Rebuttals

#1 Consumer Suggestion

I had the same problem

AUTHOR: Brit - (U.S.A.)

with the very same Carmax back in Dec 08. I hope you have since gotten this resolved. If not, and for any other readers in VA who are going through this, this comment is for you.

I bought an 06 Passat from them and three days after I drove off the lot the check engine light came on. One week taler, the turbocharge on the engine stopped working. Acceleration was sluggish, the engine vibrated badly, and my husband who is military got in a lot of trouble for failing an auto safety inspection before a long weekend. I took it to their service dept and they didn't even have the updated scanning equipment to do a diagnostic on it! I don't know how they can claim to have done a full inspection if they didn't even have equipment that could read the computer for an 06 vehicle but whatever. I still had some Manufacturers warranty left so they pawned me off onto Brown's VW down the street, who were of no help. They serviced the vehicle 2 times after that and replaced the exact same cylinder 1 coil 3 times. Each time it burned out in less than two weeks.

Ontop of all that, their service dept was impossible to get in touch with. Messages and calls were left unreturned, my sales associate was useless after he sold me the car and refused to help, and I thought I was stuck with a car we couldn't use. I called the main office in Richmond and started a log of complaints. About the car, customer service, everything. I called every day to check on the status of the situation. I was never rude or lost my temper, but I made sure that they knew I was not taking this lightly. Carmax complaints resulted in no action.

I finally got fed up and contacted the VA Dept Of Agriculture And Consumer Affairs. I was put in touch with a lot of great people who had dealt with Carmax before and learned all I ever needed to know about VA laws in regards to consumer affairs. Unfortunately, my car was out of the grace period allowed by the Lemon Law, but I did have recourse under Code of Va 59.1-200 which states:

59.1-200. Prohibited practices.

A. The following fraudulent acts or practices committed by a supplier in connection with a consumer transaction are hereby declared unlawful:

1. Misrepresenting goods or services as those of another;

2. Misrepresenting the source, sponsorship, approval, or certification of goods or services;

3. Misrepresenting the affiliation, connection, or association of the supplier, or of the goods or services, with another;

4. Misrepresenting geographic origin in connection with goods or services;

5. Misrepresenting that goods or services have certain quantities, characteristics, ingredients, uses, or benefits;

6. Misrepresenting that goods or services are of a particular standard, quality, grade, style, or model;

7. Advertising or offering for sale goods that are used, secondhand, repossessed, defective, blemished, deteriorated, or reconditioned, or that are "seconds," irregulars, imperfects, or "not first class," without clearly and unequivocally indicating in the advertisement or offer for sale that the goods are used, secondhand, repossessed, defective, blemished, deteriorated, reconditioned, or are "seconds," irregulars, imperfects or "not first class";

8. Advertising goods or services with intent not to sell them as advertised, or with intent not to sell at the price or upon the terms advertised.

In any action brought under this subdivision, the refusal by any person, or any employee, agent, or servant thereof, to sell any goods or services advertised or offered for sale at the price or upon the terms advertised or offered, shall be prima facie evidence of a violation of this subdivision. This paragraph shall not apply when it is clearly and conspicuously stated in the advertisement or offer by which such goods or services are advertised or offered for sale, that the supplier or offeror has a limited quantity or amount of such goods or services for sale, and the supplier or offeror at the time of such advertisement or offer did in fact have or reasonably expected to have at least such quantity or amount for sale;

9. Making false or misleading statements of fact concerning the reasons for, existence of, or amounts of price reductions;

10. Misrepresenting that repairs, alterations, modifications, or services have been performed or parts installed;

11. Misrepresenting by the use of any written or documentary material that appears to be an invoice or bill for merchandise or services previously ordered;

12. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, using in any manner the words "wholesale," "wholesaler," "factory," or "manufacturer" in the supplier's name, or to describe the nature of the supplier's business, unless the supplier is actually engaged primarily in selling at wholesale or in manufacturing the goods or services advertised or offered for sale;

13. Using in any contract or lease any liquidated damage clause, penalty clause, or waiver of defense, or attempting to collect any liquidated damages or penalties under any clause, waiver, damages, or penalties that are void or unenforceable under any otherwise applicable laws of the Commonwealth, or under federal statutes or regulations;

14. Using any other deception, fraud, false pretense, false promise, or misrepresentation in connection with a consumer transaction...



I got my ducks in a row and called Carmax back in early January with my newfound knowledge. I was put in touch with a manager immediately. They did some research and found out that the car had been wrecked (this was not due to shadiness on their part. The accident was never reported to DMV) and got the service records. They took the car back, gave me a 100% refund check or the option to re-do my contract and get a different car. I had the poor saleswoman jumping through hoops hoping to find something for the right price that I would like. I was so pleased with the way the manager Russ handled it, and customer service from my salesperson Cynthia that I bought another vehicle from them, this time an 08 Jeep. Since then customer service has been stellar, and my husband and I absoluitely LOVE our new SUV. I will probably buy from Carmax again, but I will know to be more cautious. Just because the commercials are all sunshine and rainbows, remember you are still buying a USED car.

Carmax will work with you, just be sure to have everything documented and above all educate yourself on your rights as a consumer. Hope this helps.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#2 Consumer Comment

You are not the only one out there....

AUTHOR: Ward107 - (U.S.A.)

I hate to see this has happened to sommeone else..The problem with CarMax is that they somehow they buy wrecked vehicles that havn't been reported to the BMV and donot have accident reports on them. They pay a under standard bodyshop to do the repairs. I had pulled a carfax report prior to buying my vehicle, and they provided some other type of vehicle confidence check and also that was clear of any accidents or insurance claims. I had taken my vehicle in to get a dent appraised and they spotted the damage in the front end. They said my front end was all replaced with either take-offs or salvage parts. They said just looking at it and not putting anything down in writeing that the frame was bent, he said that 100.00 and he would get it in writing because of the steps involved. I have had so many issues mechanically with it. I think what happens is they either they buy leases that have been wrecked and returned or repos that have been wrecked, then the coperate company would write off the negitive losses and carmax has a clean titled vehicle that they can pay a cut rate body shop to fix for hardly nothing. I assure you that carmax repared your vehicle after they purchased it at the last auction indicated on the carfax report. I hope a class action suite would form on this. My vehicle is not worth crap to any dealership in the columbus area because they know carmax's practices. The first thing they look for is damage.. Say if your vehicle was worth 15,000.00 when you puchased it from carmax, the car dealership you want to trade it in at estimates the repaired damage to be 7500.00 even though it cosmettically looks good they will deduct the 7500.00 plus whatever else they feel would inhibit the sale of your vehicle. We unwhittingly bought a red light vehicle that is only worth a fraction of the purchase price. I know mine should of been in the junk yard. I know there are a lot of people that do not know they purchased a wreck and are having many mechanical issues and dont know why, well carmax does. I wish you the best....
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#3 Consumer Comment

Curious...

AUTHOR: Been There Done That - (U.S.A.)

Did they show you the Carfax when you bought it or have you obtained one in the meantime? I would highly suggest that you order the report prior to their return call. If it shows on there the damage prior to your purchase you very well could have a claim with Carmax. Also, if there is damage and NOT on Carfax report Carfax used to have a warranty validating their data as accurate. Might want to also validate that as an avenue.

Problem I see for you is the amount of time that has elapsed since your purchase and the damage has been discovered. If no record shows on the report it will be very difficult for you to prove your case should they decide to argue the validity of your claim.

Curious, was this car from their retail lot or one of their auction sales?

Good luck and keep us updated.
Respond to this report!
What's this?
Report & Rebuttal
Respond to this report!
What's this?
Also a victim?
What's this?
Repair Your Reputation!
What's this?
X